The Takeover Thread - Duchatelet Finally Sells (Jan 2020)
Comments
-
Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml
Flats have now been built where the new upper east tier would be. Does this mean that The south and corners are the only areas that can now be redeveloped.Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml0 -
That 40,000 design would be like a mini Old Trafford. Love it.1
-
Yeah......and where are the potholes?golfaddick said:Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtmlScoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml
Where's the tower block ??? Fake news.Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml0 -
Welcome to my worldThe Red Robin said:That 40,000 design would be like a mini Old Trafford. Love it.
Won't you come on in?
Miracles, I guess
Still happen now and then1 -
Wasn't the main thinking around the east stand expansion more about corporate boxes increasing the number and quality of them? And as you say the work on the east stand would have had a minimal impact on capacity.Airman Brown said:
There’s now a construction methodology and evacuation issue with the east stand in particular - however the majority of the capacity potential is at the Jimmy Seed stand end. You would only get 3,000 extra from the east and the south-east corner even if it’s still acceptable in planning terms, which I doubt.ShootersHillGuru said:Hasn’t Airman already told us previously that evacuation issues would now be a problem in doing very much with the east and Jimmy Seed stand because of the housing developments.
There is potential to create a new access via The Heights. It’s a major piece of engineering work and there are other issues, but still much cheaper than a new stadium.1 -
So Redbull would change our name, move us to a new stadium and change the Kit.
There’s already a London club with a stupid name, large bowl shaped stadium and a dodgy Kit - they’re called Arsenal
Maybe go support them?3 -
big money is in reaching Premier League and or Corporate boxes, plenty of scope for the latter at the Valley, same time can se surrender part of the West for away fans instead, ta0
-
Really disappointed those plans see no place for the Jimmy Seed statue.Todds_right_hook said:Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml
Flats have now been built where the new upper east tier would be. Does this mean that The south and corners are the only areas that can now be redeveloped.Scoham said:
Yes there were plans to eventually extend to 40,000.JamesSeed said:Apologies if this has been covered before, but could the Jimmy Seed Stand be rebuilt as a double decker (were we to be in the position of needing increased capacity)? I imaging there would be planning permission difficulties, although I seem to remember that it was something that had been proposed before relegation from the PL?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/london/content/articles/2008/03/06/greenwich_cafc_feature.shtml
#notinmyname
;-)0 -
Off you go then.milo said:So Redbull would change our name, move us to a new stadium and change the Kit.
There’s already a London club with a stupid name, large bowl shaped stadium and a dodgy Kit - they’re called Arsenal
Maybe go support them?
1 -
David blitzer and Joshua Harris the 2 Americans who splashed the cash to acquire 18% each of "the Surrey club" must have intentions to move the club from down town Thornton heath to swanky Surrey which is 50% of their fan base if/when they get the majority holding. Joshua Harris must be the same dude who did due diligences on Charlton with we are led to believe the intention of leaving the valley.1
-
Sponsored links:
-
Let's worry about getting out of League 1 and maybe getting 20k crowds before we think about ground redevelopment.12
-
Any updates from VOTV today?
Perhaps there’s someone in the directors box?0 -
Or in the stands?.sammy391 said:Any updates from VOTV today?
Perhaps there’s someone in the directors box?0 -
Someone said on Twitter Roland is here?.0
-
Surely, he wouldn't dare?Valley27000 said:Someone said on Twitter Roland is here?.
0 -
highly unlikely to say the leastValley27000 said:Someone said on Twitter Roland is here?.
1 -
Think it would be all over Twitter and Facebook if he was!1
-
Think he would be attending STVV,S game at home tonight,better dancing.0
-
Varney is here with 2 others that I don’t recognise.12
-
In the Directors box?cafc_harry said:Varney is here with 2 others that I don’t recognise.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
P O I D Hcafc_harry said:Varney is here with 2 others that I don’t recognise.
0 -
YesT_C_E said:
In the Directors box?cafc_harry said:Varney is here with 2 others that I don’t recognise.
4 -
-
Takeover when?.0
-
Any photos?cafc_harry said:Varney is here with 2 others that I don’t recognise.
0 -
Bought a flask with soup in, Charltonised Red Bull already, maybe we'll changer their fucking logo.Taxi_Lad said:Oh.....!!!!
5 -
Home game. Usually we get a few snippets of a rumour or two.
Over to you.0 -
What’s everyone’s thoughts on a move to the peninsula? Could be alright?11
-
Where has Wembley come from ??Henry Irving said:
Yes, we could move into Wembley, become RB London and have big crowds and trophies.Addickted said:
I'm sure there are more sites that are viable rather than just the peninsula though.Airman Brown said:
Massive redevelopment and investment in local infrastructure is also required at Morden Wharf. The spivs identified a timescale of eight or nine years in 2012-13 (in part because of planning and land ownership issues) in a process that hasn’t even started - nobody is moving to the peninsula in the foreseeable future, whether a move has any merits or not.Addickted said:
Can't argue with any of that.AFKABartram said:
As a Luddite dinosaur, I don’t think he does in any way shape or form. Clubs move grounds primarily for two reasons 1. they have outgrown over a consistent period their existing one or 2. their old ground has fallen into such disrepair or in need of modernisation that it would cost too much money to address without further benefits.Addickted said:To be fair @The_President does raise some valid arguments about the Club moving away from the Valley.
Quite simply The Valley IS Charlton Athletic.
In our history of bland, non-achievement the successful fight the supporters went through to secure its return is the one shining light that provides our identity and makes us stand out as a club. It is adequately modernised and sustainable for the next 20 years at least, and currently we are only a third filling it.
Even after a period of relative success we can see how flakey our newly gained support was ten years down the line. We are not West Ham with a 250k plus historic support base to tap into and we cannot currently sell more than 4 executive boxes.
Pres said he would happily up sticks, move ground, change our name, our badge and our colours etc if it looked like delivering more football success. He’s probably not alone in that, but that to me is Wimbledon / MK Dons and i have to question why anyone is so uncomfortable or wishing to change what is fundamentally our own skin, our identity, and as someone raised yesterday, why you have been seeking to drive and lead protests when the heart of those protests is very much based on the threat and disregard to the club’s identity. With the greatest respect, I just don’t get it.
This club still it has its base and core at heart and needs rebuilding, and I’m sure it will with realism that there is probably a ceiling to potential achievement over the medium term.
What it doesn’t need is ground moves for non-football reasons, and it never ever ever needs to change its name.
And if that makes me a Luddite dinosaur then I’m very proud to be one.
Got that off my chest :-)
However, I felt the point that @The_President was making if that we want to successfully compete at the very highest level of football then it's unlikely that The Valley would be able to support that without massive re-development and the subsequent investment in local infra structure to support 40K fans turning up three times a month.
Thankfully, the likes of Red Bull won't be our new owners and therefore the whole argument is hypothetical.
The spiv ownership collapsed in part because it was not clear that a peninsula scheme with a stadium could ever be delivered. Hard nosed major investors looked at it and walked away because they were not persuaded it could be stacked up.
That would be OK for the President.
It wouldn't be ok for me.
There just isn't a business case for moving to a new stadium in SE London now or in the near future.
The resale value of the valley land wouldn't cover the costs of a new ground and the increased income potential could more easily be achieved by rebuilding the Valley.
I'm not saying we can never leave but the new has to be a significant benefit above the current to make it viable or justifiable.
More importantly, it just ain't happening.
Let's cross that bridge when and if we ever get to it.
We haven't even got rid of Duchatelet yet.
Keep your eye on the prize.
Has it recently moved to South-East London ??
1 -
***CONFIRMED***Taxi_Lad said:Oh.....!!!!
2
